Pike vs Pike battle, how quickly they degrade into chaotic melee?

[Yuelang]

Yeah, taking in mind two most famous pike-using factions in their specific time periods... and their tendency from maintaining cohesion toward break away in unorganized melee once their lines are broken / breached.

---

The first is Macedonian / Diadochi Pike Phalanxes, we know that in later times, after Alexander and the Original Diadochs are gone, the structure of typical Diadochi armies is growing more and more reliant toward their pike using units (Phalangitai) to the neglect of another aspects in their original combined arms approach. So obviously, most of the battle between Diadochi armies will be decided on frontal pike vs pike fight.

How long they can typically maintain group cohesion and formation before the inevitable break into melee with their secondary arms (xiphos or machaira) in absence or if we disregard the effects of another non pike wielding units present in the field (like Cavalry charge in the flanks or rear, or skirmishers successfully shooting and breaking the pike formations from afar)

---

The second is European Medieval - Early Renaissance pike squares, as before or in absence of easy to use muskets (or firearms), the trend is also increasing the relative numbers of pike wielders. Without the firearms, these blocks of men armed with pikes are mainstay of the battlefield, and thus, the battles as depicted in most late medieval paintings are often the battle between pikemen and pikemen.

How long they can typically maintain group cohesion and formation before the inevitable break into disorganized melee? Again in absence or if we disregard the effects of another, non pike wielding units present in the field (like gunners mowing down the vulnerable pikemen, cavalry charging and picking the rear and flank ranks... and cannons...).

---

Is this correct? That the Ancient Macedonian pike formations is relatively more disciplined and ordered compared to the Medieval pikemen as they are more often fight in disciplined formations instead of quickly break away in disorganized melee?

 

[Delvestius]

I don't know too much about phalanxes, but the Landsknecht pike blocks were led by Doppelsoldners, men in full plate armed with zweihanders and paid twice as much. Their job was to cut the heads off of enemy pikes. I would imagine cohesion would be strained if this soldier was killed or lacking in capabilities.

 

[Darth_Kiryan]

Didn't the Renaissance Pike formations also have some irregular firearms sharpshooters in their ranks as well?

 

[Delvestius]

Didn't the Renaissance Pike formations also have some irregular firearms sharpshooters in their ranks as well?

Indeed, though I was always curious as to the use of crossbows in such formations while firearms were on the rise but I haven't found anything substantial.

 

[FrozenMix]

Renaissance Pike Battles arose because professional armies needed a way to defeat traditional cavalry lancer forces that dominated the battlefield before, and the pike offered that. But beyond that, pikes were used because it allowed groups of men in formation the chance to definitively control a part of the battlefield, and to break a pike square was to break an enemy army, as without that very powerful square, you have a bunch of scared men carrying unwieldy poles, and therefore, most casualties occurred AFTER the formation had been broken.

The melee, as all are, lose some formational qualities as the battle went on, but they stayed more or less orderly until the men in the first few ranks either were incapacitated or fled, or if a square was flanked. Most formations, including the Swiss and Landskencht ones, used also small groups of sword wielding infantry in addition to the pikemen, positioned in reserve of the square, who would come up and crawl underneath the clashing pikes and slash at the enemies in the other square, or would try to cut the head off of the enemy pikes. In Spanish armies, and as time went on, these men would carry firearms and eventually become larger and larger and have their own formations.

 

[Yuelang]

uh, I'm specifically asking the quality of melee troops in such pike formations, so missile troops (crossbows, firearms, archers) didn't count

Yes, I'm aware about the missile troops sprinkled inside the pike square and phalanxes too, but what about the (hypothetical) battle between close combat pike squares as well as pike phalanxes, which one will break faster?

 

[Delvestius]

Yes, I'm aware about the missile troops sprinkled inside the pike square and phalanxes too, but what about the (hypothetical) battle between close combat pike squares as well as pike phalanxes, which one will break faster?

My thoughts are that phalanxes would be at a greater risk of breaking due to their longer weapons being unwieldy if cohesion was strained and are extremely weak against light infantry. Renaissance pikes led to more mobile formations and tactics.

 

[Avrorrange]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PbhANeJL_T4

 

[carlton_bach]

What you are asking is basically the thing that every infantry commander at the time depended on and had no way of knowing - how long will morale hold? A pike formation will stanmd and defend until its morale breaks, and that can happen at any point in the battle. THere is no way of knowing.

Obviously, there is a point beyond which morale will not hold. A formation that is outflanked and taking heavy casualties against a numerically superior foe will break. But there is no point before that of which you can be sure. Landsknecht gewalthaufen in the Turkish wars sometimes held out on the field until almost every man was wounded. Swiss infantry held defiles for days, under heavy attack. But pikemen also broke before the first impact on other occasions. Swedish cavalry in the Thirty Years' War drove Imperial pike from the field simply by gaining the reputation that they would charge home rather than stop before the formation (you can't - but they ran anyway).

Too many factors at play to predict. The Greeks realisaed that, BTW. Our word 'trophy' comes from tropaion - the monument erected from captured enemy weapons that marked the 'turning point' of the battle. It is derived from the word 'trope', flight or escape, and means exactly that: the point at which enemy cohesion broke and the men dissolved and ran.

 

[jahenders]

Pike formations (ancient or medieval) knew that survival depended on cohesion. They could remain locked in pike combat ("at push of pike") for extended periods of time. In fact, some formations (Adding more depth or rows to the phalanx) were specifically tweaked for greater depth so they'd have more power to push through the enemy formations. Both sides would try to maintain cohesion and push until one side broke.

Bottom-line you wouldn't have trained spearmen soon breaking and fighting individually like in 300 -- if they did, they'd get slaughtered, either by other spear men or by cavalry.

 

[takerma]

As long as flanks are secure, men are not exhausted and do have some experience, for a very long time. Sidearms would probably be used very rarely.

If you want chaotic melee you want something like that account my Machiavelli of Spanish charging Swiss pike block with sword/buckler armoured infantry. Dodging past point and getting inside. That must have been a mad chaotic melee. That men could actually do it seems crazy.

 

[RGB]

There are some good examples when pike formations broke down in cohesion but not morale, and then wholesale slaughter began.

A good example is the central action in the battle of Ceresole. The front ranks of both side were severely disrupted by shooting moments before contact, and then it got ugly.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Ceresole